Continuing discussion on Tipaimukh
Md. Khalequzzaman, Ph.D.
Professor
Dept. of Geology & Physics
Lock Haven University
Lock Haven, PA 17745
mkhalequ@lhup.edu
There has been a lot of discussion and debate about the potential impacts of the proposed Tipaimukh Dam on economy and environment of Bangladesh in general and on haor region in particular. For the lack of field-based data and paucity of cooperation between India and Bangladesh on information about the project, it is difficult to make sound judgment on the impact of this project. However, based on other experience and track record on impacts of large dams on environment and ecosystem in downstream region some inferences can be made.
The following points about potential negative impacts of the proposed Tipaimukh Dam on downstream region in Bangladesh have been formulated based on hydrologic theory and published information in the electronic and press media.
(1). Tipaimukh is not the only dam in preparation, there are many (at least 72 in NE India) and Bangladesh Govt. need to negotiate a long term integrated water resources management (IWRM) plan with India, where all studies are conducted as a joint venture project before any of these dams or diversionary projects will be implemented - not after the fact, as is the case for Tipaimukh Dam.
(2). The dam will retain about 15 billion cubic meter of water at peak level, which is about 31% of the total flow of water that enters Bangladesh through Barak into Surma-Kushiyara-Meghna rivers. Therefore, it is completely unacceptable to Bangladesh that India will have unilateral control over 31% of the water in a shared river.
(3). Many people (Gawhar Rizvi, Water Minister Ramesh Shil, Dipu Moni, etc.) in the government claim that they have all the necessary information on Tipaimukh Dam and Indian government (including Monmohon Singh) reassured them on numerous occasion that they (India) will not do anything to harm Bangladesh. This logic is unacceptable for many reasons:
(a). India should not decide what is good for Bangladesh and her people without taking them in confidence. If India's intension was to help Bangladesh then they would have studied all environmental and economic impacts jointly with Bangladesh before initiating this project.
(b). India did not even inform Bangladesh about this project before they signed an agreement on Oct. 24, 2011. They are in clear violation of all laws, policies, and agreement that are practiced on shared (international rivers). The article IX in the Ganges Treaty clearly demands such co-operation and prior consent from all stakeholders. If Bangladeshi news media did not raise this issue, then India would not even bother to mention it to anyone (including the government) about the project.
(c). Indian government has issued the environmental clearance certificate on December 3 and they are going ahead with the project despite serious objections from Bangladesh and Indian environmental groups (as well as indigenous people in Monipur and Mizoram). In their environmental analysis, they never carryout out any environmental study in Bangladesh, especially in the Haor region to understand the natural ecosystem that exist and depend on natural flow of water in Surma-Kushiyara-Meghna it their numerous branches. How can India assume (without any study in Bangladesh) that they will not cause any harm to environment and ecosystem in downstream region in Bangladesh? This assumption is not based on science - it is pure guessing game. How can 40 million people living in Haor regions of greater Sylhet and Mymensingh rely on Indian assurance that is not based on any scientific study?
(4). India claims that the Tipaimukh Dam is a run-of-the-river project and no water will be diverted for irrigation, and therefore, no harm will be done to Bangladesh. This is a flawed logic because:
(a). They will have to fill up the reservoir that holds 15 billion cubic meters (BCM) of water, out of which about 8 BCM will be dead storage (i.e. will remain behind the dam permanently to maintain needed pressure to run turbines. If this 8 BCM water is released over 365 days in a year then it amounts to about 17000 cusec, which is a huge amount in dry season. As result of the dam, the flow characteristics and water release schedule each day will be different from what it was before the dam. Now the question is, how do anyone in Bangladesh know what that water release schedule will be after the dam is completed? No one in Bangladesh (maybe even in India) really knows how much water will be released on a daily basis. Can the Haor people live with this uncertainty to grow their crops? The answer is obviously NO.
(b) the life, livelihood and ecosystems in Haor region has established an equilibrium with natural flow of the rivers, and farmers prepare their field in harmony with this natural flow regime. Now, if this natural flow regime is altered then farmers will not be able to prepare their land for Boro cultivation on time and the whole agricultural production may be jeopardized. On the other hand, if India release way too much water in dry season then farmers will not have access to their land since these lands will be under unusual water. In the rainy season, the opposite may happen. If the dam completely full, then they will release water at their own will to save the dam. One can argue that there are Indian people in downstream region in Assam, Nagaland, and Monipur and India will not release extra water to cause flooding for them. It might be true, but we will not know the extent of flooding in India and how many people will be affected if no joint venture research is done. Besides, Indian government can make plan to remove their own people beforehand because they will make the decision about water release beforehand, which they may or may not share with Bangladesh.
(5) India has offered Bangladesh to invest in the project and to buy electricity from the project, which is not acceptable on the following counts:
(a). If India was serious about a joint venture project then they would not sign an agreement with three Indian entity and set a deadline of 87 months for completion of the project. They would not issue the environmental clearance with involving environmental study in Bangladesh first. So, they are just doing the lip service - they are not serious about any joint venture project.
(b). There is no treaty between India and Bangladesh about joint management of water resources in Barak-Surma-Kushiyara. If even Bangladesh invest money in the project, India will decide unilaterally how much water they will release and when.
(c). Since Barak-Surma-Kushiyara is an international river, Bangladesh don't have to pay for electricity, India should provide a fair share to Bangladesh for free as they agreed to provide some electricity to Monipur for free. More importantly, Bangladesh should find other means to produce electricity - not by destroying the agriculture and ecosystem in the haor region.
(6). Gawhor Rizvi recently (December 12) wrote that since the Tipaimukh Dam is 140 miles away from Bangladesh border its impact will be minimal on Bangladesh. The truth couldn't be far from this. Barak-Surma-Kushiyara is a continuous river and it empties in Bay of Bengal through Meghna. Therefore any interference with water flow will be felt all the way to Bay of Bengal. For example, the Farakka Barrage is over 100 miles from the shoreline in Bangladesh, but its negative impacts on the salinity intrusion, drying up of Gorai and other rivers in SW Bangladesh is a documented fact. A similar situation will happen in the greater Mymensingh and Sylhet districts should water is diverted from Barak through any dam (such as the proposed Fulertal Barrage in Assam). Salinity will encroach up the Meghna-Kalini-Kushiyara-Surma-Gorautra rivers, impacting agriculture and fisheries in parts of Habiganj, Kishoreganj, Netrokona, Sunamganj, Sylhet districts.
(7). As a part of FAP-6 study, it was concluded that if the Tipaimukh Dam is completed then the flow in Bangladesh will increase in summer months and will decrease in rainy season. This finding is questionable on the following accounts:
(a). Since India has not completed the dam they don't have any water release schedule, and if even they do have a tentative schedule then it is not clear when and how they shared it with Bangladeshi authority. Therefore the FAP-6 is carried out based on many assumptions, which may or may not be true assumptions. In fact. Dr. Ainun Nishat (who was involved in the FAP-6 study) clearly admitted that their study was done based on many unknowns and assumptions.
(b). As mentioned before, any departure from natural flow regime will mean adjustment for farmers and fishermen in the Haor region in terms of their preparation of fields, planting of seeds, and harvesting the crops. There is no guarantee that this disturbance in natural flow will bring positive feedback for the Haor region. Most importantly, the people of Bangladesh will have to rely on the mercy and decision of Indian authority for the fair share or necessary amount of water needed for their life and livelihood. The natural flow of the Surma-Kushiyara-Meghna should be warranted for well being of the people and existence of Bengal delta which has been fed by water and sediments of Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna river system during its entire existence throughout the geologic time.
Weekly BUDHBAR report:
http://budhbar.com/?p=7083
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:
http://amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/12/12/121869
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:
http://amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/12/10/121557
http://amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/12/10/121554On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:
http://amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/12/09/121383On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:India's water war against Bangladesh
http://dailynayadiganta.com/details/15201
__._,_.___
